Gun Control. . How Liberals want it How Conservatives want it. Psst, very few liberals actually want to eliminate guns. Most are reasonable and want basic restrictions on gun ownership, such as closing loopholes that allow  Gun Control How Liberals want it Conservatives Psst very few liberals actually to eliminate guns Most are reasonable and basic restrictions on gun ownership such as closing loopholes that allow
Upload
Login or register
Hide Comments
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (65)
[ 65 comments ]
> hey anon, wanna give your opinion?
asd
User avatar #31 - snerus
Reply -17 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
Liberals want to put restrictions on firearms in place to make sure citizens can't start a firefight in the middle of a crowded, packed and dark movie theatre. The guards (in this comic) are trained and able to wield their swords, just like the police are trained and able to use their guns. I really wouldn't be comfortable with fat self righteous 'Murica lardwhales wielding weapons as they holler and scream for food in McDonalds, and frankly why anybody would believe otherwise scares me.
#33 to #31 - anon id: 659e678c
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
yea well fuuuuuuuckkkk youuuuuu
#65 to #31 - anon id: 67973c9c
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
here's the problem with that. The time it takes those police officers to make it to the scene of the crime can mean the difference between 1 or 2 victims and 10-20 victims. Also all people who get concealed weapons permits are required to take classes in the proper use of their weapon, which includes marksmanship instruction. In other words a person with a concealed weapons permit is in fact trained in how to "wield their swords" as you put it. I have never met an individual who legally got a concealed weapons permit who treated the idea of carrying a firearm lightly or the way you describe them. Sure some are very vocal and "holler" about their right to carry, but very few of them take the responsibility lightly. Most of the people I know with concealed weapons permits are probably better shots than any cop you'll ever meet, and in a situation involving a public shooting, they'd be more likely to save your sorry liberal ass than the cops.
User avatar #43 to #31 - malhaloc [OP]
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
Ok think about all the people who died in those theater shootings. How many less peoe would that be if everyone had a gun there? He might have gotten 2 shots off before being a bloody pile of entrails on the floor and people would think twice before doing it again. If that's not safety idk what is.
User avatar #44 to #31 - lean
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
So your theory here is that if you pass a law making guns illegal, that the person who intends to BRUTALLY MURDER INNOCENTS will say, "Aww shucks guns are illegal I wouldn't want to break a law."

Do you know why police carry a gun? It is to protect themselves and others.
Why shouldn't I have that right as well?
#47 to #44 - frankiethekneeman
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
Actually, police carry weapons to protect themselves, not anyone else. In fact, the Supreme Court has held that the police have no obligation to intercede, and are not liable for the repercussions thereof.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia

Read that - chilled me right to the bone.
#51 to #47 - lean
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
Yeah, you need to establish contact with responding officers for them to be duty obligated to assist you. Better yet, carry and be proficient in the use of a firearm.
#61 to #44 - bazda
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
Frankiethekneeman is right. Cops only carry to defend themselves, which is still absolutely a right we are all entitled to. Not just Americans either. The right to defend your life doesn't come from a law or a piece a paper, it's part of being a human being.
#34 to #31 - subgunner
Reply +19 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
I know right!? They should have made the theater a gun free zone so you couldn't take guns in there at all!!!.......oh wait....
#1 - anon id: ce682d78
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/20/2013) [-]
except that doesn't work with a gun you absolute moron.
User avatar #2 to #1 - schnizel
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/20/2013) [-]
Ok absolute smart man, why?
User avatar #6 to #2 - rynkar
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/20/2013) [-]
I believe it would be something like that a sharp piece of metal is easy to find, but not a gun and putting more guns out there to stop the guy with a gun isn't a solution.
But then again, if there are no guns, a sharp piece of metal will probably be the next best thing.
User avatar #3 to #1 - vindictivenature
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/20/2013) [-]
Provide proof.
User avatar #4 to #1 - malhaloc [OP]
Reply +16 123456789123345869
(11/20/2013) [-]
Funny. Because Switzerland the country with the lowest crime rate in the world has only these restrictions on guns:

All men are required to own at least one, women are not required but are urged by the government.

All citizens must attend a 2 day convention where they learn gun safety and use. (ammo is provided by the government)

The gun you own may not be automatic.

Those are the only laws having to do with guns in that country. And their crime rate is so low they don't even waste the time, effort, or money to keep track of it.

Sauce provided (where's yours?) libertycrier.com/why-switzerland-has-the-lowest-crime-rate-in-the-world/
#22 to #4 - iaintevenrustled
Reply +8 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
Woah sir, don't analyze my country to push your agenda. Not all men are required to own a weapon. All men who are part of what the United States would call a Swiss National Guard are given a weapon. However, these men go through thorough training to receive it.

Switzerland doesn't have a standing army, due to the costs of keeping a docile military in a neutral state being pointless to pay. Instead of an army, they have a large body of their country trained as militia, in case of an attack. Those in the militia go through training and receive a firearm. Citizens are not required by law to undergo this training, but it's a cultural honor type deal. You're expected to, and my family is very pleased that I'm going through it next summer.

If someone wishes to purchase a firearm in my great country, they need to have a permit. A gun license of sorts (Waffenerwerbsschein) which is German for something along the lines of gun acquisition permit. It allows you to purchase up to 3 guns. To obtain a permit you need a background check and a financial check from the criminal records bureau and your bank.

This is much tighter gun control than any American plan so far, so don't you dare think that you can just look at the homicide rates of my peaceful home and push weapons of war into the hands of the unjust. The United States is much larger, and its citizens are more diverse. Needless to say, there are many in the United States who shouldn't be allowed to drive even, but are allowed because "Freedom".
#37 to #4 - pyromania
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
They also have mandatory military service. Are you in favour of the draft?
User avatar #32 to #4 - iamnuff
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
I guess people in switzerland are a hell of a lot smarter than most americans then, because if you gave a free gun (and two day safety course) to every man in america, the population would have halved in a month, just from them shooting themselves in the face trying to work out why it wan't firing.

also, in a country where everyone has guns, it doesn't make it impossible to use a gun to rob someone, it just means you actually HAVE to shoot them, a threat is no-longer enough
#8 to #4 - qualityjudges
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(11/20/2013) [-]
Couldnt the reason Switzerland has the lowest crime rate be that they are fairly wealthy? Wealthy nation with a welfare state useally has a lower crime rate, just look at scandinavia.
User avatar #11 to #8 - malhaloc [OP]
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/20/2013) [-]
I'd say its because since everyone's got a gun they don't want to take a bullet to the face. America was pretty wealthy for a while and with welfare and our crime was never that low.
User avatar #14 to #11 - killthebilly
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(11/20/2013) [-]
America? Welfare? Joke of the century.
#52 to #4 - mayoroftownsville
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
Only those in the military are required to own guns. After military service has ended, owners can relinquish or keep their guns.

Switzerland also has a relatively high gun-related death rate, though lower than that of the U.S.

Source: www.snopes.com/politics/guns/switzerland.asp

Switzerland doesn't have the lowest crime rate in the world, or even the lowest homicide rate. Both are low, but are beaten out by many other nations, most of whom have extremely strict gun regulations.

Sources: www.numbeo.com/crime/rankings_by_country.jsp
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate#By_country

Learn to fact check.
#48 to #4 - mrfahrenheit
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
Post hoc logical fallacy: In or of the form of an argument in which one event is asserted to be the cause of a later event simply by virtue of having happened earlier.

Without proof of Switzerland's gun control policy causing the lower crime rate, it could just as easily be said that the two happen together coincidentally.
#15 to #4 - insanefreak
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/20/2013) [-]
Speaking from a Belgian perspective here, but Swiss cops are rumoured to be quite effective and 'elite'. Maybe that has something to do with the lower crime rate as well? The low crime rate of Switserland has always been a topic of interest to me, but finding proper sources of information is difficult.
#10 to #4 - anon id: f84fbd6f
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/20/2013) [-]
Biggest ******** someone posted about Switzerland for quite a while and I've seen a lot! Cheers from Switzerland
User avatar #12 to #10 - malhaloc [OP]
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/20/2013) [-]
again i ask for source. inb4 you say you know because you're from switzerland
User avatar #23 to #12 - iaintevenrustled
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
You shouldn't need to ask for source when you can literally Google Switzerland gun policy and get every fact straight.

www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/switzerland


Oh, and to back up my earlier statement, here's a link I found almost matching what I said.


"The government and pro-gun groups argued, however, that the country’s existing laws regulating the sale, ownership and licensing of private guns, which includes a ban on carrying concealed weapons, are stringent enough. The law allows citizens or legal residents over the age of 18, who have obtained a permit from the government and who have no criminal record or history of mental illness, to buy up to three weapons from an authorized dealer, with the exception of automatic firearms and selective fire weapons, which are banned."

Read more: How Switzerland Developed a Gun Culture That Works | You need to login to view this link world.time.com/2012/12/20/the-swiss-difference-a-gun-culture-that-works/#ixzz2lF8yBU9f
#9 to #4 - SimianLich
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/20/2013) [-]
The problem with that is that the Government controls the ammo supply. Kinda hard to use a gun with no bullets.
User avatar #13 to #9 - malhaloc [OP]
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/20/2013) [-]
The government provides ammo for the event. Otherwise citizens can purchase their own.
#69 to #13 - SimianLich
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/22/2013) [-]
The government has strict control on who can and who cannot have ammunition. A gun without bullets is just a fancy club.
#5 to #4 - anon id: 82aec6c3
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/20/2013) [-]
So because everyone is scared they will start a shoot out they never commit crimes, smart.
User avatar #7 to #5 - malhaloc [OP]
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/20/2013) [-]
Pretty much. And I don't think people are too willing to break in to someone's house to get a military grade rifle in the face either. The best way to keep people safe is to make sure everyone's dangerous.
User avatar #16 to #7 - rynkar
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(11/20/2013) [-]
Its like civilian grade mutually assured destruction.
#17 to #16 - autoxx
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/20/2013) [-]
An armed society is a polite society.
#24 - jakatackka
Reply +12 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
Psst, very few liberals actually want to eliminate guns. Most are reasonable and want basic restrictions on gun ownership, such as closing loopholes that allow felons to buy guns.

Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Most liberals just want to keep the guns away from those people who do kill, whether on accident or on purpose.
#25 to #24 - rety
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
closing loopholes wont do anything since criminals don't have to follow laws when they buy guns.They're criminals. those "Loopholes" are just law abiding citizens exercising their right to free enterprise.
#27 to #25 - jakatackka
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
I should correct myself. I don't know if the trade show loophole is the most common one, but it's the one I'm most familiar with.
#29 to #27 - rety
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
its the most commonly talked about one, though there is a lack of evidence in its criminals connections.
The one true loophole is the ability for a felon to create a trust and purchase guns using that.
#26 to #25 - jakatackka
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
Except no. Obviously there's not much that can be done to stop true black market dealings, but realize that not many people actually have access to this, besides gang members. The most common loophole is being able to buy guns at trade shows without any form of identification; you could have literally just broken out of jail and you can waltz right in and pick up a gun.

Beyond that, the other main initiative is to properly train people that do get guns legally, especially how to keep those guns safe and out of the hands of unsafe users, especially small children. I can't count how many stories I've heard on the news of a four-year old getting a handgun and accidentally shooting someone, usually their sibling, and killing them.
#28 to #26 - rety
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
*could*
Have you ever been to a gun show? Almost everyone there has an FFL, which means background checks, ie criminals don't go there, thats like trying to buy guns at a store.
The only way for criminals to get guns are private dealings, which will happen whether illegal or legal, making them illegal only hampers law abiders.

As for unsafe users, there are those in every field, these are just tragic and very publicized for that reason. Training will not help much or at all since the people that would put guns in areas acessible to kids probably wouldnt change. Though these are tragic accidents, we must be objective and look at them along with the DGUs of the Usa(defensive guns uses) and when put in that context, it is extremely minute.
#39 to #28 - jakatackka
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
Just because we can never get rid of a problem doesn't mean we should just sit back and watch. The fact that the US, despite being one of the most powerful and affluent nations in the world in every aspect, has one of the highest rates of gun violence in the developed world is pretty bad; obviously it can stand to be improved. The two best methods are either complete eradication of guns (which is actually quite effective, despite what fearmongerers might say) or universal ownership and subsequent strict training of firearm safety. In the case of the US, the latter would probably be more effective.
#68 to #39 - rety
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/22/2013) [-]
"Complete eradication of guns"- never gonna happen, so point in discussing,
but "universal ownership and subsequent strict training" is something I think reasonable, like Switzerland does. However, I fear too much government involvement in guns and that industry as the entire purpose of these weapons is defense against tyranny, or atleast in the eyes of founding fathers.
But I beleive that universal ownership would intensely decrease crime and make the world safer, since law abiders are so much more populous than criminals
User avatar #45 - fistymcbutthole
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
It sounds really stupid, but if everyone had a gun... the crime rate might go down. A mugger/ rapist/ jehovas witness would really think twice about harming someone if there was a good possibility of them having a gun. And if there ever was a robbery or something, people would just shoot them.
User avatar #56 to #45 - frenzyhero
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
But they themselves have a gun and the element of surprise. So that argument is invalid. Not to mention, many gunowners arent properly trained in how to effectively use their weapon, so if they should ever need it, they're not going to know how and when to use it. Having a weapon makes someone more likely to use it, it's happened to me, and if they think they're *******, they'll probably end up endangering not only themselves but others.

In conclusion, whatever, remove full automatic and high caliber weapons from general public and train all gun owners on how to use their guns. That's the best solution I can think of to keep just about everybody happy.
#66 to #56 - smithforprez
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
yeah, everyone will be happy and safe with the all powerful govt watching over them
and sending armed thugs to our houses to take things they think we don't need.

#60 to #45 - bazda
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
Not might,will. Look up Kennesaw County, Georgia.
#42 - Yojimbo
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
I'm a liberal, and I love guns
I'm a liberal, and I love guns
#54 to #42 - facepalmftw
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
And I love you.
#62 - yeorey
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
I really don't like the idea of the centralization of firearms to an entity that is very susceptible to corruption.

Statism will not set you free.
User avatar #30 - enkmaster
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
I think Canada has a nice balance when it comes to gun laws. Only non-fully auto center fires (there are people who have them, but the only way is through the grandfathering program so dont bother trying yourself), 5 round magazine caps for semi automatics. Rimfires can have as large a magazine as you want. No AK or AR platforms or variants, for some reason I havent found yet.

Must have a restricted permit for certain platforms and handguns/revolvers, can only bring restricted firearms to a gun club you have registered with.
User avatar #35 to #30 - subgunner
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
I believe Canada (were i live) is good with gun laws as well, but dammit i don't understand the no AKs (we have ARs) and i would like a ten round magazine at the range instead of five, the five was put in place for hunting, not sport shooting i happen to do both, but i agree with licensing and restricted handguns which i have a licence to own. keeps a certain level of common sense within the firearms community.
User avatar #36 to #35 - enkmaster
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
Im also Canadian, and I agree about the no AK thing (You can get CZs though, which are sort of the same). Where can you get ARs, though? I assume they're restricted only, but I havent been able to find any.
User avatar #38 to #36 - subgunner
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
some are prohibited, others are restricted by name. but there are a few unrestricted but most of them are hunting models. you just gotta look. depending where you are i can give you some stores but the best place to look online is You need to login to view this link
also they have seized and won't let anymore czs 858s into the country as they may be changed to prohibited. vz 58s are still good though. but i love my old sks **** the best
User avatar #40 to #38 - enkmaster
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
From what I understand, the CZs that have been seized were because the manufacturer mistakenly used full auto parts in their semi auto models, violating import law. I read that they are being shipped back and the mistake rectified, then they'll be let through again. Thats just hearsay as far as I know though.
User avatar #41 to #40 - subgunner
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
i have hear multiple different things on the subject. my understanding is you are indeed correct about the shipping error, but the RCMP want to outright ban the gun so it dosn't happen again...flawless logic.....
User avatar #20 - mexicandudeinsd
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
i dont get it damm im not smart today
User avatar #21 to #20 - sketchysketchist
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
Liberals want to ban guns, which make the soldiers unable to fight the monkey who only gets more violent.
Conservatives want people to stay armed so when the monkey attacks, they can fight back, then it's too scared to do much after that.
User avatar #59 - heretofuckshitup
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
i'd rather have cops use non-lethal rubber bullets, bean bags, tasers, and tranquilizers. these are the best ways to subdue a criminal in the eyes of any officer without actually killing them.

If a cop is afraid of some kid or a barking dog the reaction should be to pump them with lead even if the officer fears for their life. Cops become cops knowing that they put their life at risk, its called to protect and serve not to enforce and ticket. i commend them when they do their jobs because i get how stressful it can be but if a cop is abusing their power than they aren't in the right profession
#57 - mondprinzessin
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(11/21/2013) [-]
gettin political in the comments
gettin political in the comments
[ 65 comments ]
Leave a comment